‘…it shows that there's no limits’: the psychological impact of co-production for experts by experience working in youth mental health

Abstract

Co-production is commonly conceptualised as a more equal sharing of power and decision-making between a dichotomy of service user and service provider, each bringing valuable and different assets to the process. Experts by experience lie in the overlap between this conceptually created duality, providing the services they now do by virtue of having once used services themselves. Previous related studies suggest that their involvement in co-production could impact positively on their social capital, self-esteem, self-efficacy and life skills. However, no studies have been explicitly psychological or phenomenological in nature, and the theoretical basis for such outcomes remains under-developed. This phenomenological study explored the psychological impact of co-production for young people who were paid experts by experience for a young person's mental health charity in a large and diverse urban area in the UK, looking at the what of psychological impact, as well as the theoretical why and how. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of five males, with a mean age of 25 years. Interpretative phenomenological analysis yielded three master themes: the co-production approach, I'm a professional and identities in transition. Participants valued a collegiate organisational approach that prioritised empowerment, agency and equality between experts by experience and 'experts by qualification', leading to a positive impact on their self-efficacy and self-esteem. Co-production impacted fundamentally on their identity structure, enabling them to explore a new identity as a 'professional'. The results are framed within identity process theory and point to the potential benefits of this model to co-production.

Comparison of a co‐produced mental health service to traditional services: A co‐produced mixed‐methods cross‐sectional study

“…The study provides insights into stakeholders' views and experiences of the differences between co‐produced and traditional services. These findings expand and are consistent with previous research highlighting the benefits of co‐production (Mayer & McKenzie ; Needham & Carr ; Slay & Stephens ). Additional studies are needed to determine the causal relations between benefits and co‐production, assess cost‐effectiveness, and investigate processes and challenges in the implementation, delivery, and outcomes of co‐produced mental health services.…”

“…According to the narratives of MCC participants, the centre adheres to the co‐production values identified by Cahn (): recognizing peoples' assets, valuing work differently, promoting reciprocity, and building a social network. Similar to the study by Mayer and McKenzie () on the psychological impact of co‐production, MCC users emphasized the possibility of exercising control and perceiving their feelings as being valued and treated with respect as the central themes related to the experience of co‐produced services. In study 2, these themes emerged in stark contrast to their accounts of their experiences with traditional services, which users and professionals related to a lack of freedom, asymmetrical relationships, and a focus on the illness.…”

Implementing co-production in traditional statutory mental health services

“…These benefits, as highlighted by Durham College and the Regional Municipality of Durham Social Services Department (2016), the HSE (2017 a or b?? ) and Mayer and McKenzie (2017), are due to the fact that co-production implementation increases service-user control and reduces in stigma. There is also increased acknowledgement of the fact that lived experience is a valued knowledge base in the therapeutic relationship.…”

Collective Deliberations and Hearts on Fire: Experiential Knowledge Among Entrepreneurs and Organisations in the Mental Health Service User Movement

“…The growing recognition of experiential knowledge in the mental health sector (Noorani 2013;Restall et al 2011) is reflected in the emergence of 'experts-by-experience' (McLaughlin 2009;Noorani 2013) hired to work alongside medical professionals in mental health services (Mayer and McKenzie 2017;Meriluoto 2018), and also in an increased emphasis on 'lived experience' (Rose 2016). It can further be seen in the promotion of service user involvement in research (e.g.…”